Restricting promotions of food and drink high in fat, sugar or salt - proposed regulations: consultation

Section 2: Price promotions

39. Price promotions refer to special offers where there is a reduction in the usual price of a product. These may be time-limited or conditional on some other requirement, such as purchasing another item(s) or being a member of a loyalty scheme. It does not include other marketing and promotional strategies such as product placement or advertising.

40. In 2022, around 20% of the food and drink we bought in Scotland from shops including supermarkets was on price promotion, which can take a number of different forms. Most (14.4%) was purchased through temporary price reductions (TPRs), 5.1% on "Y for £X" e.g. 3 for £1 and other multi-buys e.g. buy one get one free and 0.4% via other forms of price promotion.^[11] Discretionary foods have been found to be more frequently purchased using "Y for £X" promotions than some healthier categories such as fruit, vegetables or bread^[12].

41. In our 2022 consultation, we set out proposals to restrict multi-buy price promotions and sought views on including meal deals and 'extra free' within the scope of the policy. We also sought views on restricting unlimited refills for a fixed charge on targeted soft drinks with added sugar.

42. Overall, non-industry and individual respondents tended to support the inclusion of 'extra free' and 'meal deal' offers in multi-buy restrictions on the basis that these offers result in unintended purchases and over-consumption. Industry respondents showed some preference for including 'extra free' on the basis of alignment with England. Those that disagreed with the inclusion of 'extra free' primarily suggested 'extra free' promotions do not drive over-consumption or that restricting them would undermine competition and hamper smaller businesses and new products. Overall, industry respondents disagreed with the inclusion of meal deals, on the basis this would not align with restrictions in England, or that meal deals are distinct from other multi-buy offers, and are cost effective, convenient and do not drive over-consumption.

43. Non-industry and individual respondents tended to support restricting unlimited refills for a fixed charge on targeted soft drinks with added sugar on the basis that these offers encourage over-consumption of unhealthy drinks. A large proportion of industry respondents did not have a specific view on this issue. However, there was a level of support among industry on the basis that this approach would align with regulations in England.

44. A more detailed breakdown of the feedback is available in section 4 of the independent analysis report of the consultation, published in May 2023.

Multi-buys and unlimited refills

45. Taking into account the feedback to our 2022 consultation, we propose that the following types of price promotion will be within scope of restrictions:

A. Multi-buys

46. Multi-buy means:

i) where the purchase of multiple items is cheaper than the purchase of each individual item separately. Examples include: 2 for £1, 3 for 2, buy 6 and get 25% off.

ii) where a promotion indicates that an item, or part of an item, is free. Examples include: buy one, get one free and 50% extra free.

47. Meal deals are also a form of multi-buy and are considered in detail at paragraphs 58-77 of this consultation.

48. We propose restricting multi-buys on the basis that these are particularly effective at increasing the overall volume of promoted product purchased. As noted at paragraph 78 in our 2022 consultation, data from around 30,000 British households between 2013 and 2015 showed an estimated volume uplift for multi-buys of 25%. Given these types of promotions encourage an increase in the amount of product purchased, they can encourage increased consumption.

49. We propose that multi-buy restrictions will apply to targeted foods which are pre-packed and are HFSS (as defined by the 2004/05 NPM). This approach was discussed in detail at paragraphs 34-38 of this consultation.

50. Our proposed approach to multi-buys is consistent with the UK Government regulations for England (excluding meal deals which are not restricted in England).

B. Unlimited refills

51. Unlimited refill in this consultation means a promotion that offers the consumer at least one refill of the same drink or another drink (within scope of the restrictions) for free (including top ups) after the consumption of the first drink.

52. We propose that unlimited refills for a fixed charge on soft drinks with added sugar that are HFSS or "less healthy" (as defined by the NPM), whether pre-packed or non-pre-packed, will be restricted. Non-pre-packed refills of other targeted foods are not proposed to be within scope of the policy at this time.

53. This is on the basis that unlimited refill promotions are essentially a flexible form of a "buy one, get one free" multi-buy offer. As set out at paragraph 79 of our 2022 consultation, there is evidence to suggest that consumers seek to get their "money's worth" leading to an increase in consumption and this can be affected by the price charged.

54. Our proposed approach to unlimited refills is consistent with the UK Government regulations for England.

Further considerations

55. Price promotions (multi-buy and unlimited refills) that are within the scope of the proposed regulations and are communicated to the consumer via any means will be restricted. For example, promotions communicated via the packaging of targeted foods as well as promotions that are communicated to a consumer through associated signage, are proposed to be restricted. The proposed restrictions on price promotions include both in-store and online promotions – see section 4 of this consultation for further detail on businesses in scope of these proposed restrictions.

56. We propose that a period of 12 months is allowed for packaging that includes a volume price promotion within scope of restrictions (such as "extra free") to be phased out.We expect this to provide sufficient time for businesses to work through existing stock with on-pack price promotions and for compliant packaging to become available.

57. We will continue to monitor the intentions of the UK Government (and the Welsh Government once they set out their plans) with regard to the planned coming into force of their volume price regulations and any proposed periods for the purposes of stock transition. As noted earlier in this consultation, the UK Government's volume price restrictions are currently due to come into force on 1 October 2025 and allow a period of 12 months to allow for stock transition of promotions on packaging.

C. Meal deals

58. Meal deals are a form of multi-buy promotion where the purchase of multiple items is cheaper than the purchase of individual items separately, which could encourage consumers to purchase more in order to obtain a discount. For example, more than half of respondents to a 2023 consumer survey (55%) agreed that buying a meal deal means they buy and consume items they would not otherwise have purchased, compared to 21% that disagreed.^[13]

59. Meal deal promotions come in a variety of forms but typically comprise three or four items - typically a ready to eat main, a snack and a drink or a combination of a main(s), side(s), starter and/or dessert and a drink. Healthier options are often available but not always. A mystery shopper study in Scotland in 2022^[14] found healthier items were obviously available to include in meals deals in around three-quarters (76%) of outlets visited in-person, which included supermarkets and quick service restaurants. In almost a quarter (24%) of outlets surveyed, no healthier items were obviously available. An academic study by Leek et al (2023) analysed whether the calories contained in lunch meal deals in several UK chain shops in a single locality were 600kcal or less for that meal occasion. They found that 23% of available deals exceeded 600kcal, with the highest calorie deal totalling 1,329kcal, more than double the recommended guideline.^[15]

60. Evidence suggests that meal deals are prevalent and commonly purchased. A recent study found that 21% of adults in Scotland report purchasing a lunchtime meal deal once a week or more and 24% purchase a lunchtime or evening meal deal at least once a week. A majority (88%) of respondents reported typically choosing a less healthy snack, such as crisps or confectionary (which are discretionary items), to go with their lunchtime meal deal. Convenience is a key driver of purchase, followed by cost.^[16]

61. Rebalancing meal deals towards healthier options has the potential to influence behaviour towards making healthier choices and reduce the purchase of HFSS items. For example, the consumer survey found that 32% of those who purchased meal deals reported their most likely response to less healthy items not being available as part of meal deals was to "still buy a meal deal but one that includes non-restricted, healthier items". A further 9% reported they would "just buy and eat a main with no additional items".^[17]

62. Feedback to our 2022 consultation on targeting meal deals was mixed. Where there was agreement, this tended to be on the basis that meal deal offers are prevalent and targeting HFSS components would help to support a shift towards healthier alternatives. Disagreement was on the basis that the inclusion of meal deals would not align with the restrictions in England or the view that meal deals are distinct from other multi-buy offers and do not drive over-consumption.

63. The consumer survey found a greater proportion of respondents were supportive of restrictions on inclusion of less healthy items in meal deals (40%) than opposed (24%).

64. Further engagement through a series of recent roundtable discussions with key stakeholders largely mirrored the feedback to our consultation. Public health stakeholders supported the inclusion of meal deals within scope of the policy. This is on the basis that they encourage over consumption and a comprehensive policy will have the greatest public health impact. Industry stakeholders considered a meal deal to be a planned and not an impulse purchase and so did not have the same potential for over consumption and stockpiling as other volume price promotions. On this basis, overall industry stakeholders did not think that meal deals should be within scope of the policy.

65. Taking into account the feedback to the consultation, roundtable events and recent evidence gathering, we propose to include meal deal promotions within the scope of promotion restrictions on the basis that they encourage consumers to purchase more than they may have otherwise planned, in order to get the deal and HFSS items are common elements of such deals.

66. We propose that a meal deal promotion is:

an offer of a discounted price for multiple items promoted as intended to be consumed together as, or as part of, a meal by one, or by two or more people. Examples include lunchtime meal deals and dine in offers.

67. We recognise that meal deals are somewhat unique in that they are available in a variety of formats and combinations, which can vary between types of stores and the type of meal deal on offer.

68. There are therefore different ways in which we could target meal deals to support improvements in diet - by helping reduce overconsumption of HFSS targeted foods and shifting the balance of meal deals toward healthier, non-HFSS choices.

Options

Option 1: Meal deals cannot contain HFSS targeted foods.

69. If one or more components of a meal deal are an HFSS targeted food (as defined by the NPM) then the products could not be sold as a meal deal, as proposed at paragraph 66. Meal deals that do not contain targeted HFSS foods (or contain targeted foods that pass the NPM) would not be subject to the restrictions.

70. This is the most comprehensive approach. It would mean that only non-HFSS targeted foods could be offered as part of a meal deal, which would support healthier choices and encourage positive behaviour change. It is recognised that this approach would limit the range of items that can be offered as part of a meal deal, however this option may also accelerate and encourage businesses to reformulate products in order to offer customers more choice. It is acknowledged that HFSS targeted foods could still be purchased in addition to a meal deal promotion.

Option 2: Meal deals can contain up to one HFSS targeted food.

71. If two or more components of a meal deal are a HFSS targeted food (as defined by the NPM) then the products could not be sold as a meal deal, as defined at paragraph 66. Meal deals that contain one targeted food that is HFSS, or only contain targeted foods that pass the NPM, would not be subject to the restrictions.

72. This option would support a rebalancing of meal deals toward healthier options by limiting the volume purchase of HFSS targeted foods (as defined by the NPM) as part of a meal deal. A meal deal could contain up to one HFSS targeted food, but would not be able to include multiple HFSS targeted foods – similar to our proposed approach to restricting standard multi-buy promotions. Whilst not as comprehensive as option 1, we would still expect this approach to discourage the purchasing of multiple HFSS items and add-ons, in turn reducing consumption of HFSS targeted foods overall. By allowing up to one HFSS targeted food to be included, this option would provide businesses with greater flexibility on the range of items that could be offered as part of a meal deal. This balance may support businesses to maintain choice for consumers but with a greater emphasis on encouraging healthier choices. However, it is recognised that, compared to other options being considered, this approach might be more challenging to implement and communicate to consumers.

Option 3: Meals deals cannot contain targeted HFSS discretionary foods.

73. If one or more components of a meal deal includes a targeted HFSS discretionary^[18] food (as defined by the NPM) then the products could not be sold as a meal deal, as defined at paragraph 66. Meal deals that do not contain targeted HFSS discretionary foods (or contain targeted discretionary foods that pass the NPM) would not be subject to the restrictions.

74. This option focusses specifically on targeted HFSS discretionary foods which contribute substantially to energy, fat, and sugar intakes in the diet.^[19] As noted at paragraph 60, discretionary food items (crisps and confectionary) are the most commonly reported item purchased as a typical snack for lunchtime meal deals^[20]. Further examples of discretionary foods that are frequently sold as part of meal deals include soft drinks with added sugar, puddings and desserts. We therefore expect that restricting the availability of targeted HFSS discretionary foods offered as part of a meal deal would help to support consumers to make healthier choices.

75. Focussing on targeted HFSS discretionary foods only would not restrict the inclusion of other targeted foods, such as HFSS ready meals. We recognise that this is not as comprehensive an approach as set out in option 1. However, we propose that this approach would help to maintain greater flexibility on the range of items that businesses could offer as part of a meal deal, compared to option 1. Further, this option could encourage businesses to offer healthier alternative snacks as part of a meal deal which, in turn, could support positive changes in consumer behaviour.

UK Government and Welsh Government

76. Meal deals are not within scope of the equivalent regulations for England.

77. The Welsh Government set out in a statement in July 2023 that it is minded to pursue restrictions on meal deals but has still to set out its proposed approach. We will continue to explore with the Welsh Government opportunities for consistency in our approach to targeting meal deals, including with regard to definitions, so as to minimise regulatory burden on industry.

D. Temporary price reductions

78. Temporary price reductions (TPRs) are short term reductions in the price of food and drink products. Most retailers will run such offers on specific items for a typical duration of 2-4 weeks before reverting back to the full price but this can vary.

79. Food purchases have consistently been greater on TPRs than for other price promotion types. In 2022, 14.4%^[21] of the food and drink purchased through retail was on TPRs.

80. As set out in our previous consultation, economic modelling indicates that a policy to restrict all price promotions (i.e., TPRs, multi-buy, "Y for £X" and other promotions) of discretionary foods (including ice cream and dairy desserts) could potentially lead to a reduction of 613 calories per person each week compared to a reduction of 155 calories per person for restricting multi-buy promotions only. Further, whilst multi-buys may generate the greatest sales increase when compared to TPRs, the latter still significantly expands sales.

81. Given the prevalence of TPRs, the evidence does suggest that restricting TPRs, in addition to multi-buys, is capable of enhancing the positive impact of the policy on dietary health. This would in turn support our aim to reduce the health harms associated with the excess consumption of calories, fats, sugars and salt.

82. Feedback to our 2022 consultation on the inclusion of TPRs was mixed. Agreement tended to be on the basis that TPRs are used to promote unhealthy products or could encourage unintended purchase. Disagreement was primarily on the basis of a preference for alignment with England or the suggestion that there was insufficient evidence to justify their inclusion. A more detailed breakdown of the feedback on TPRs is available in section 4 of the independent analysis report of the consultation, published in May 2023.

83. Further engagement through a series of recent roundtable discussions with key stakeholders further reinforced the feedback to our consultation. Public health stakeholders strongly supported the inclusion of TPRs within scope of the policy to maximise the impact. This was on the basis that TPRs are highly prevalent and not targeting them would create a loophole that could significantly undermine the public health impact of the policy. Industry stakeholders strongly opposed the inclusion of TPRs on the basis that they are a competitive tool used to differentiate between brands and stores and support product development and innovation. It was noted that TPRs can also help to reduce costs for consumers. Industry stakeholders reiterated that deviating from the approach in England would have significant implications for businesses.

84. Taking this feedback into account, the Scottish Government preferred policy position is to include TPRs within scope of restrictions. This is on the basis that they remain highly prevalent and there is clear evidence that restricting TPRs in addition to multi-buys has the potential to considerably enhance the positive impact of the policy on diet.

85. We propose to broadly define TPRs as follows:

Temporary price reductions are a promotion where the normal price of an item is discounted for the duration of a defined, time limited period before reverting back to the item's usual price.

UK Government and Welsh Government

86. TPRs are not within scope of the equivalent regulations for England.

87. The Welsh Government has set out that it is minded to pursue restrictions on the use of TPRs. We will continue to explore opportunities for consistency with the Welsh Government, for example on the definition of TPRs, so as to minimise the regulatory burden on industry.

Definitions

88. We propose to be consistent with the definitions for volume price promotions as set out in the UK Government regulations for England where possible and appropriate (excluding meal deals and TPRs which are not restricted in England).

89. We will engage with stakeholders as appropriate to support the timely development of guidance materials which are comprehensive to support effective implementation and enforcement.

Questions

Question 4 - Is the proposed description of the following sufficiently clear for the purpose of implementation and enforcement:

a. multibuy? Yes/ No/ Don't know

b. extra free? Yes/ No/ Don't know

Please explain your answers.

Question 5 - Is the proposed timescale of 12 months at paragraph 56 sufficient to allow price promotions on packaging to be phased out?

Yes

No

Don't know

Please explain your answer.

Question 6 - What, if any, implications do you expect there would there be for businesses if meal deals are included within scope of this policy? (please include evidence where available)

Comment

Question 7 - If meal deals are included within scope of the policy, which would be your preferred option for targeting them?

Option 1 - Meal deals cannot contain HFSS targeted foods.

Option 2 - Meal deals can contain up to one HFSS targeted food.

Option 3 - Meals deals cannot contain targeted HFSS discretionary foods.

Please explain your answer, including any alternative suggestions for how promotion regulations could help improve meal deals to better support a healthy diet.

Question 8 - If temporary price reductions (TPRs) are included within scope of the policy, is the proposed broad definition at paragraph 85 sufficient for implementation and enforcement?

Yes

No

Don't know

Please explain your answer.

Question 9 - What, if any, implications do you expect there would be for businesses if TPRs are included within scope of this policy? (please include evidence where available)

Comment